Blog Page 2




Two university students’ were charged Monday before a Nairobi court with conspiracy to defraud NCBA bank of over Sh210 Million.

Anthony Nginge and Ann Wambui Nyoike, both IT students of Jomo Kenyatta University of Science and Technology (JKUAT) appeared before Milimani Resident Magistrate Muthoni Nzibe Njagi and pleaded not guilty to the charges leveled against them.

The duo are accused that at unknown place on or before October 20 this year with others not before court conspired to defraud NCBA bank Kenya of sh 190,767,195.

Prosecution told the court that the on diverse dates between October 20 and 22 this year at NCBA bank head office in upper Hill Nairobi county jointly with others not before court stole Sh 25,400,000 the property of said bank.

They were released on a bond of Sh 2 Million and the matter to be mentioned on November 10 2020.




Director of public prosecution Noordin Haji has accused former Kiambu governor Ferdinand Waititu of derailing a graft against him by feigning sickness.

And now, to put the matter of Waitutu’s sickness to rest, Haji wants the trial court to direct Kenya Medical Practitioners and Dentist Board to appoint three doctors to examine the politician and file a report in court.

In the application made before trial magistrate Thomas Nzioki, the DPP through Victor Mule and Joseph Riungu, also want Waititu to undergo a mental assessment to confirm whether he is mentally sound.

The DPP said the report will inform an application he intends to make, seeking the cancellation of Waititu’s bail terms over his conduct in the Sh588 million graft trial.
The former governor has claimed he has been sick since August 30, stalling the graft trial.

“Waititu’s failure to appear in court has made it impossible for this case to proceed and we urge a team of independent practitioners do examine him and the mental assessment report filed in court for purposes of the court to assess his mental status. We intend to make an application to have his bail cancelled,” Mule submitted.

The trial was supposed to start Monday morning only for Waititu’s lawyer John swaka to inform the magistrate that his client is admitted at Jumuia Hospital.

“My client has been unwell. He went for check up on October 24 and was referred to High Dependency Unit (HDU) for admission at Jumuia Hospital following a recommendation by his personal doctor. As we speak today, Waititu is admitted to hospital and not ready to proceed with the case on account of his health,” he said.

He sought a further adjournment of the case but the DPP vehemently opposed the application saying the conduct of Waititu is meant to further delay the graft case.

Mule said that the two medical documents tabled in court by Swaka on behalf of Waititu does not indicate the doctors who examined him.

The prosecutors added that the conduct of Waititu is not only based on his health. He said on January 20, 2020 he made an application to have the case adjourned to attend to his impeachment proceedings before the Senate and on August 30, 2020 made another application claiming that he had tested positive for Covid-19 following results from Lancet laboratories.

On October 21 Waititu failed to appear in court and through his lawyer tabled in court a medical report super care medical center showing that upon further review on his status of Covid -19 he still complained of chest pain and dizziness.

Mule further urged the court to order the case against the governor’s wife Susan and his co-accused person to proceed without Waititu.

“We seeks that the criminal case against all accused person to proceeds in the absence of Waititu. The court do exercise its discretion and find that the right under Article 50 of the Constitution and Section 206 of the Criminal Procedural Code (CPC) is not absolute,” he said.

Swaka opposed the request to have Waititu undergo a mental assessment saying that the same will infringe his rights as he has personal doctors.

“By ordering a team of medical practitioners to examine him, it will be tantamount to infringing the accused person’s right as he has personal doctors,” Swaka said.

He added that if the case proceeds without the governor’s being present in court it will amount to injustice and a fair trial.
Waititu was charged on July 29, 2019 with fraud, conflict of interest, dealing with suspect property, money laundering and abuse of office.

Saika Two Estate Developers Limited, a firm owned by Waititu and his wife Susan Wangari, was said to have received more than Sh25 million from Testimony Enterprises Limited Contractor, a firm contracted by the county government to develop roads through an irregular tendering process.




Auctioneers receiving instructions from suppliers of goods at Tusker Mattress has suffered a major blow after the High court stopped them seizing and selling assets belonging to the strungging retail.

In his ruling, Justice Francis Tuiyott barred the supermarket’s creditors from attaching its assets, pending further directions on October 27.

The Judge, however clarified the orders does not affect Greenspan ltd, which has sued the retailer over rent arrears.

“Having read the affidavit of Patrick Ogola sworn on October 16, 2020, I hereby order a stay of any attachment, sequestration, distress or execution against the property of the company pending further directions,” ruled Justice Tuiyott.

In the latest application, Tuskys moved to court saying that there were threats to seize and auction its go-down in Komarock on October 21.

Further, the retail giant had been furnished with new orders freezing its accounts over a debt of Sh 34.5 million by Diamond Trust Bank.

According to lawyer Patrick Ogola, the funds in the accounts were crucial working capital, which should be preserved to keep its operations running.

He said the go-downs in Komarock has its stocks and tools of trade and selling them would jeopardise plans of reviving the supermarket.

“I am also aware that the applicant faces imminent auction at its premises at the Oasis Mall in Malindi,” he said.

The supermarket revealed that they secured Sh 2.1 billion funding from a Mauritian firm and on September 18, the investors released Sh500 millions as commitment.

The funds, he said went to pay rent arrears of Sh119 million, suppliers Sh112.7 million, settlement of old debts Sh219.8 million and payment of salaries, Sh48.5 million.

“Indeed, a portion of the creditors on record in this petition have benefitted from the part settlement of their debt owing to this initial tranche of the facility,” says Ogola.

The lawyer said a significant portion of the funding paying its liabilities and the supermarket was granted 45 days to kick start the drafting, review and negotiations and thereafter reach out all its creditors on how to settle the debt.

“From the foregoing, it is clear that the applicant is truly intent on settling all debts truly owed by it, and has now set out a clear plan within which to do so,” he said adding that the supermarket continued to face more cases in court, which he termed as predatory.

Among stocks seized at goods at Greenspan Mall, Juja City Mall, Karen Crossroads and Kilifi branches, which have been seized by Rentworks East Africa ltd, through a court order issued on September 18.

Other creditors that have sued the supermarket are home appliances and electronic dealer have Hotpoint, which is seeking Sh248 million from Tuskys.

Hotpoint rushed to court seeking to wind up the Tusker Mattresses Limited, arguing that the retail giant was unable to settle the debt.

“The Petitioner imports the goods sold to the Company. As result, the failure by the Company to pay for the goods promptly, the Petitioner is suffering losses. Therefore, the Petitioner claims interest for the unpaid goods at the rate of 14% per annum from April 28,2020,” Hotpoint said in the petition.

Court documents showed that Hotpoint supplied Tuskys with refrigerators, water dispensers, cookers, coolers, microwaves and TVs.

Security company, Syndicate Agencies has also sought to wind-up Tuskys over a debt of Sh30 million.




Former Nairobi Speaker Beatrice Elachi has suffered a severe blow in her bid to challenge orders stopping the impeachment of Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko.

The Employment and Labour Relations court dismissed Elachi’s objection, challenging the court’s jurisdiction after issuing an order stopping the impeachment process.

“In conclusion the preliminary objection application dated and filed on March 4, 2020 by the Elachi is hereby dismissed,” ordered Justice Byram Ongaya. The Judge further ordered Elachi, who resigned from her position in a huff, to pay the cost of the application.

The court also extended orders stopping an attempt to impeach Sonko pending the hearing and determination of the case.

In the decision, Justice Ongaya said Governor Sonko needs not wait for his right and fundamental freedoms to be violated and therafter move the court. He said Sonko was entitled to arrest the alleged threats to violation of his rights.

“The court considers that the Governor’s is based on Article 236(b) and therefor he was entitled to invoke the court’s jurisdiction,” the Judge said.

Justice Ongaya ruled that the court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter and that by hearing the cases is not undermining the delicate balance on institutional comity between the three arms of government and the supervising the work of parliament or county assembly.

He further found that by entertaining Sonko’s petition does not intrude the political realm of things.

Sonko had opposed the objection saying Elachi was acting mischievously and was totally hypocritical, because on September 6, 2018 when she was being impeached by the same County Assembly, she moved to the same court and successfully obtained reprieve.

Lawyer Harrison Kinyanjui, for Sonko, told the court that Elachi had also faced a similar challenge to her case of jurisdiction and she had asserted the same defences to sustain her case, and the Court had ultimately ruled in her favour.

“Aware of those facts, she had no moral or legal basis to object to the Court’s Jurisdiction in Governor Sonko’s case, and so the court dismissed her objection, and upheld the order issued in favour of Governor Sonko stopping the impeachment process”, Kinyanjui submitted.

Elachi had however indicated to the court through her Advocate, Mr. Kokebe, that were she to lose at the application, she would give up and dropped the intention of fighting any further. It remains to be seen if she will abide by her commitment.

MCA Imwatok who is charged with defrauding a businessman Sh2. 1 million had supported Elachi’s Objection and he equally lost.




Disgraced High Court Judge Martin Muya has been allowed 30 days to prepare his appeal challenging his sacking early this year for alleged gross misconduct.

Lawyers Fred Ngatia and Philip Nyachoti successfully applied for more time to submit their legal arguments to the Supreme Court and serve the documents on the Attorney General.

The chief government legal advisor is representing the seven-member judicial tribunal, chaired by retired Appellate Judge Alnashir Visram, which found Justice Muya guilty of flouting the judicial code of conduct on March 17.

Supreme Court Deputy Registrar, Daniel Ole Keiwua directed that the matter be mentioned on November 20 to confirm compliance. The file will then be presented to Chief Justice David Maraga to give directions on the hearing date.

The recommendations by the Visram team were presented to President Uhuru Kenyatta on March 20 at State House in Nairobi, effectively ending the career of the long-serving judicial officer. Justice Muya was a magistrate before his appointment to the bench.

The tribunal concluded that Justice Muya was guilty of gross misconduct by his delay in delivering reasons for his ruling dated May 30, 2017 in a commercial dispute while sitting in Bomet. But the Judge had justified his professional handling of the civil suit, in which his decision has never been challenged in the Court of Appeal.

The complaints against Justice Muya were first investigated by a JSC committee chaired by Prof Olive Mugenda. The other members were Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, Emily Ominde and Patrick Gichohi.

The Judge said the JSC exceeded its jurisdiction by delving into the merits of a commercial dispute and usurping the appellate jurisdiction contrary to the law. “The commission arrived at an illogical, irrational, unreasonable and erroneous conclusion,” he protested in court papers.

Nyachoti said the complaint against Justice Muya was, who was based in Bomet, was lodged by the law firm of Onyinkwa and Company Advocates on behalf of NIC Bank on August 17, 2017. The firm had written to the Chief Justice and resulted in the disciplinary process.

NIC bank lodged that complaint against Justice Muya in a 2016 commercial dispute between it and Alfred Kipkorir Mutai and Kipsigis Stores Ltd. The Judge after numerous adjournments granted an injunction against the bank and reserved the reasons for five months.

In its report to the President, the JSC observed that the defunct bank suffered financial loss despite its pleas to the Judge that the vehicles offered as security for the disputed loan had already been sold by the defaulting borrowers.

The commission had concluded that the petition against the Judge had disclosed “open bias, abuse of office, incompetence and gross misconduct.”

The tribunal, which conducted its proceedings at the Kenyatta International Convention Centre in Nairobi, comprised Justice Visram, retired High Court Judge Festus Azangalala, Senior counsel Lucy Kambuni, lawyers Ambrose Weda and Andrew Bahati Mwamuye and members Sylvia Wanjiku Muchiri and Amina Abdalla.The lead Assisting Counsel was Paul Nyamodi, assisted by Senior State Attorney Stella Munyi. The Joint Secretaries were Peter Kariuki and Josiah Musili    




Felix Orinda alias DJ Evolve now seeks to withdraw charges of attempted murder against Embakasi East MP Babu Owino.

Through Lawyer Kenneth Mumbo, Orinda informed trial magistrate Bernard Ochoi that he wants the criminal case against the MP withdrawn under section 204 of the Criminal Procedural Code(CPC).

Owino was charged with two counts including attempted murder and denied shooting DJ Evolve at B Club located along Galana Road in Nairobi on January 17, 2020.

The DJ wants the case withdrawn claimingn that he wants to concentrate on his treatment rather than the pending case which was affecting his healing process due to divided attention.

In a letter filed in court, lawyer Mumbo says that the family of Orinda acknowledged that both the accused MP Babu Owino and the DJ had been goods friends before the incident.

The letter further states that the family have been in constant communication with the victim who had categorically expresssed considered position that he did not want the case to continue hence the letter to the DPP to have the case withdrawn.

However, upon perusal of the letter state counsel Jacinta Nyamosi said since it had been addressed to his boss Noordin Haji and the case being of great public interest, there was need to give the DPP sufficient time to consider the issues raised before giving his response.

Nyamosi said the DPP wished to understand the motivation and the reason why the victim’s family had taken the position to withdraw the matter rather than the prosecution of the MP.

“The DPP needs to engage the victim, the family of the victim and their lawyers to find out the motivation,” said Nyamosi.

She added that Orinda was not physically and mentally capable at the moment and they needed to get the latest medial assessment report to assess the ability of DJ to give the instructions of withdrawal of the case against Owino.

However the defence objected to the request to have the DPP granted more time saying that whatever information they need to ask was available from the medical report and the victim himself who was present in court or the counsel for the victim.

Owino submitted that settlement out of court is allowed in law for any offence and being of a public interest case did not preclude it from being withdrawable from out of court settlement as all cases are equal before the law.

The magistrate declined to allow the withdrawal as requested by DJ evolve and granted the DPP’s a month satisfy himself on the issues raise before he can give his directions on the matter.

“in my view considering the mandate of the DPP under article 157 it is imperative that the DPP and the victim have a meeting to clear the air on the issues raise by the DPP, ” ruled Ochoi.




A former senior transport officer at the Office of the DPP William Ashael Osoro has suffered a blow after the High Court upheld a four-year sentence for abuse of office.

Justice Mumbi Ngugi dismissed Osoro’s appeal, which sought to quash the sentence imposed on him ower court’s decision to sentence him over theft of fuel valued at Sh7.9 millionat the office of the DPP.

“I find no merit in the appeal. It is hereby dismissed and the conviction and sentence upheld,” ordered Justice Ngugi.

The former top transport officer had been convicted and sentenced by Milimani Anti-Corruption Magistrate Teresia Murigi for arbitrary directing the use of a fuel card for the purchase of fuel, lubricants and pitstop services valued at Sh7.9 million.

Murigi sentenced him to serve four years imprisonment or pay an alternative fine of Sh 600,000.

The court heard that between September 1, 2013 and April 25, 2018, Osoro stole the fuel, lubricants and pistop services, which were the property of the DPP’s office.

Osoro had challenged his conviction on grounds that the trial Magistrate erred in law by failing to take into considerations that the prosecution case had material inconsistencies which were consistence with his innocence

“The trial court erred in law disregarding evidence in his favor and such failure occasiones a miscarriage of justice,”said Osoro.

Further, Osoro argued that he was charged because he had installed a tracking device on the vehicle used by the then DPP Keriako Tobiko.

He added that since the other officers in the office of the DPP made improper used of the vehicles by taking unauthorized journeys or failing to register purchase in the fuel register, he should not be the only one charged with the criminal offence.

However while demissing his appeal the judge noted that the trial court observed that the DPP should endeavour to take necessary action against the officers who made unauthorized journeys and failed to observe internal process or misused government vehicles does not exonerate Osoro from his culpability for his abuse of office in the arbitrary use of the fuel card.

The court however said his defense does not hold water as the auditor’s report which triggered this case was prepared even before Director of Public Prosecution Noordin Haji took office.

The court noted that, the committee that was tasked to analyze the audit report on fuel management advised DPP Haji to refer the matter to the DCI George Kinoti as it noted that there were fraudulent acts revolving the cards.




It has now emerged that Director of Public Prosecution Noordin Haji withdrew graft charges against JamboPay bosses, despite overwhelming evidence.

In a compromise, the DPP entered a deal with Webtribe limited, which trades as Jambopay together with Robert Muriithi Muna and CEO Danson Muchemi, to turn them into witnesses as opposed to charging them over the loss of Sh1.1 billion at the National Hospital Insurance Fund (NHIF).

But it emerges that Directorate of Criminal Investigations George Kinoti had gathered enough evidence against the duo over the scam. The decision to withdraw the case is a huge blow to investigators and efforts they put in the matter and it is believed that the entire case might collapse.

The agreement does not state whether the firm or its directors will refund the Sh 1.1 billion that they received from the fund being taxpayers’ money.

According to investigations carried by DCI, it was established that Webtribe limited was awarded tender No.NHIF/018/2013-2014 for provision of Integrated Revenue Collection Services and tender No. NHIF/001/2017-2018 for provision of Integrated Revenue collection system through a deliberately flawed procurement process to their advantage.

The investigation documents states the reason for the flawed procurement process was the item was not captured in the procurement and budget plan for the financial year 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 and despite not having been factored in the procurement and budget plan, the then chief executive officer Simeon Ole Kirgotty approved procurement of the said item.

Further, investigations revealed that the deputy procurement officer was instructed to prepare a procurement plan specifically for the item which upon consultation with ICT general manager, arrived at an estimated cost of Sh30 million.

The value of the tender as per the resultant procurement plan was Sh 30 million and the procurement plan did not envision any commissions.

“To the contrary, NHIF with the assistance of the evaluation committee, tender committee and with approval of the CEO awarded the contract to MS Webtribe at a cost of Sh49,513,440.00 million inclusive of taxes being one off payment and commission on transactions banks collections, mobile money collections, electronic cards collection and agency Network collection at four percent each,” revealed the investigations.

Investigators said the actual value of the contract awarded could not be estimated and by the time the contract expired on June 30, 2017, Webtribe had ripped off the institution over Sh1 billion in commissions noting that the company was only offering a platform (system) that would relay information on transactions conducted by NHIF and therefore it did not make logic for them to get commissions on what the system was expected to do.

The DCI also established that the said contract entered between Webtribe limited and NHIF on August 15, 2014 had a three years lifeline and was to expire on June 30, 2017.

However, on August 25, 2017 two months after the contract had expired, NHIF CEO Geoffrey Mwangi aided by the head of procurement Pamela Marendi made two extensions of six months each, thereby extending it by one year during which Webtribe limited fraudulently benefited from commissions of Sh.226,157,936.

It was further found that Webtribe did not fulfill the terms of the contract as per the expected deliverables as undermentioned which would have enabled NHIF to manage the system operations on their own. It also emerged that the company never provided NHIF with a webserver for which they were paid Sh3,500,000 and never provided NHIF with Point of Service Terminals (P.O.S) for which they were paid Sh16,000,000.

After completing investigations, the investigation team forwarded the duplicate inquiry file to the DPP on November 19,2018 vide DCI letter Ref. DCi/IB/SEC./4/3/1/VOL.III/151 where Haji in consideration of the evidence presented before him directed the eighteen others, Webtribe limited, Danson Muchemi and Robert Muna to be with fraudulent acquisition of public property.

Due to the fact that Webtribe through IMSS had acquired crucial transaction records and NHIF members’ data and immediate termination of the services without an alternative would cripple the operations of the funds, prosecution applied for an order barring Webtribe from interfering with IMSS until the matter was heard and determined.

Trial magistrate Douglas Ogoti had on December 11, 2018 barred the company from interfering with IMSS.

Attempts by the company and its bosses  to set aside orders by the trial court in the High Court flopped and later they resorted to threatening NHIF with imminent disruption of services through numerous correspondents to the fund payment was not made to them as a result of the continuation of services.

While withdrawing the charges, prosecution stated that “That pursuant to lawful compromise between the DPP and the directors of WebTribe, the court does grant a pardon to the office of prosecution as enslaved by section 5(1) of the Anti-Corruption and Economic Crime Act. That consequence thereto Muriithi and Muchemi be freed and or discharged as accused persons in this case and or any other case arising from the same or similar fact,”.

The DPP has urged the charges withdrawn under section 87(a) of the Criminal Procedural Code (CPC) on grounds that they give evidence against their co-accused persons surrounding the award of the contract of revenue collection at NHIF.

In a letter by Alexander Muteti on behalf of DPP, Murithii and Muchemi have now agreed to be prosecution witnesses although they illegally received millions of taxpayers’ money from the national health insurer. 

According to the letter the duo were made prosecution witnesses on condition they avail them and their employees to testify in the case against their co-accused persons.

However, a non-governmental organization, Global Legal Action Network, has now written to the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) over the move by DPP to drop charges against Muriithi and Muchemi.

The NGO now wants EACC to take action and ensure the Jambo Pay bosses face the law over the financial scandal. The letter was copied to the National Assembly and Public Service Commission.

On the other hand activist Okiya Omtatah has since sued the DPP for allegedly encroaching on the mandate of the National Police Service.

Other than drawing the boundary between the mandates of the two institutions, the activist has petitioned the High Court to guidelines recently published by the DPP titled, “Guidelines on the Decision to Charge, 2019”.

“A declaration be made that Section 5(2)(b) & (3) of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act No. 2 of 2013 is unconstitutional and therefore, invalid, null and void,” he said.

Omtatah further wants the constitutional court to declare that the principal decision to charge or not to charge a suspect with a crime and registering such a charge in court is the culmination of and an integral part of the investigative process and it is strictly the exclusive mandate of the Police.

According to Omtatah, the DPP’s mandate to institute and undertake criminal proceedings commences only where a charge is contested but the DPP, he said does not have any mandate in the criminal investigation process and has no capacity in law to call for police files before formal charges are laid in a court. 

He further seeks that the court to declare that the DPP’s practice of endorsing or approving miscellaneous criminal applications made by the police, including police applications for custodial periods to hold suspects for further investigations, before the applications are filed in court, is unconstitutional.

Omtatah wants the court to rule that the DPP has no capacity in law to endorse charge sheets before they are registered in court and he does not have any powers or role to play in drawing, signing and presenting a charge sheet in court.

“A declaration be made that to be binding, any subsidiary legislation purporting to set out the exercise of the powers and functions of the DPP must be published in the Kenya Gazette before they become effective,” he said.




Keroche Breweries CEO Tabitha Karanja has accused Director of Public Prosecutions Noordin Haji of leaving out crucial information regarding the death of her daughter Tecra Muigai.

In an affidavit filed in court, Karanja further said it was curious for Haji to override DCI George Kinoti’s decision for the inquest to be held in Nairobi in contravention of provisions of section 386 of Criminal Procedure Code which vests primary responsibility into the institution and the conduct of the inquest in the national police service and the nearest magistrate.

She added that her daughter died at Nairobi hospital in Nairobi and the nearest court is Milimani Magistrate court which should conduct the inquest over her daughter’s death.

Karanja further told the court that she complained to DCI Kinoti when it appeared to her that the death of her daughter was to be treated as a mishap or accidental death.

She also claim that the medical reports shows that her daughter was a victim of a cold murder and was subjected to a severe trauma by a blunt object and fractured the most secured bones in the human body.

Tabitha still questions why DPP changed his mind after exercising his power to withdraw a murder charge against Lali Omar and recommend the inquest. Yesterday Haji claimed there was no sufficient evidence to charge the suspect with the murder and dismissed claims he has interests in the matter.

She further wants the DPP to explain the reason why in flush and instant of thought, he changed his mind suddenly and whether his decision must be reasonable, rationale , lawful and for the public interests.

“My family are victim of the heinous crime of murder of our child and Director of Public Prosecution has acted curiously and capriciously without regard to our pain, suffering and vulnerability”, added Tecra mother.

The family further said that twenty four witnesses are based in Nairobi and four in Lamu.

The family wants Haji to appoint an independent prosecutor to handle an inquest into the death of their daughter Patricia Tecra Muigai.

Through the mother Tabitha Karanja, the family said after the withdrawal of the charges against Omar Lali, they lost confidence in the DPP. She said Noor should, therefore cease from the matter and appoint an independent prosecutor to handle the case going forward. 

The family further opposes DPP’s plan to transfer the inquest from Milimani magistrate court to Lamu. “We oppose the request by the DPP to withdraw the current inquest proceedings from this honourable court,” Karanja said.

She said the decision to withdraw the inquest from Nairobi came as an extreme shock to the family and the move by DPP was whimsical and arbitrary.

“That family of the deceased finds it hard to believe that it is a mere coincidence that there has been the foregoing flip-flopping on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions evidenced by a decision to charge the key suspect with murder at Garsen Law Courts, followed by a near simultaneous recall of the said decision and the decision to institute the present inquest proceedings at Milimani Law Courts followed by a near simultaneous decision to withdraw the said inquest proceedings from the said courts,” she said.

She said the family no longer has confidence in the DPP handling the matter in strict compliance with the dictates of the constitution and the law.

Karanja said the conduct of the DPP has left the family with many unanswered questions on what extrinsic interest that the DPP may have in the matter.




Director of Public Prosecution Noordin Haji has asked the court to dismiss an application by Busia Governor Sospeter Ojaamong seeking to declare a corruption case against him a mistrial.

In response to the suit filed by Ojaamong and five others, the DPP says that the petition is an effort by the accused persons to avoid trial, which is ongoing before the Chief Magistrate Douglas Ogoti.

He said the accused persons are desperately seeking to avoid the trial at all costs due to their inability to mount any credible defense against overwhelming evidence presented against in the course of the trial.

According to the prosecution the accused persons have litigated on the same matters and issues that they are raising again a clear abuse of the process of the law.

“In the circumstances, the prosecution avers that this Petition is res judicata and fits the bill for dismissal on that basis and it is nothing more than an abuse of the process of the court,” reads the court papers.

Last week Governor Ojaamong got temporary relief after the hig court temporarily stopped his trial in the Sh8 million graft case involving solid waste management.

Ojaamong said he had suffered a mistrial when the prosecutor threatened and intimidated his witness, forcing one of them to drop out.

However the DPP has denied the grounds raised by the governor and his co-accused saying that that there is no misconduct at all, nor any procedural error that has occurred in the proceedings to warrant a mistrial.

Through state lawyer Grace Murungi, the DPP said he has not concealed any documentary or any other evidence to the detriment of the accused persons including specific procurement plans and budgets relevant to the case as alleged by the Busia boss.

“That the rulings delivered by both the trial court and the various high courts that were involved are matters that may be challenged by way of appeal or review or through the process provided for under the law but are not matters that can be addressed through a constitutional petition,” argues DPP.

Meanwhile the prosecution further took issue with the defence saying that the Petitioners are recording the proceedings for purposes of witness coaching, which they argue that it is irregular and unlawful.